1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Enrico Viglino Week 3 (Oct. 12)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
IMAP: Discovering Complex Semantic Matches Between Database Schemas Ohad Edry January 2009 Seminar in Databases.
Advertisements

Schema Matching and Query Rewriting in Ontology-based Data Integration Zdeňka Linková ICS AS CR Advisor: Július Štuller.
Protégé/OWL Imports/Namespace facilities Daniel Elenius.
Mustafa Cayci INFS 795 An Evaluation on Feature Selection for Text Clustering.
Learning to Map between Ontologies on the Semantic Web AnHai Doan, Jayant Madhavan, Pedro Domingos, and Alon Halevy Databases and Data Mining group University.
Comparison of Data Mining Algorithms on Bioinformatics Dataset Melissa K. Carroll Advisor: Sung-Hyuk Cha March 4, 2003.
Amit Shvarchenberg and Rafi Sayag. Based on a paper by: Robin Dhamankar, Yoonkyong Lee, AnHai Doan Department of Computer Science University of Illinois,
 You will be able to: › Explain what is meant by an expert system and describe its components and applications.
Schema Summarization cong Yu Department of EECS University of Michigan H. V. Jagadish Department of EECS University of Michigan
Research topics Semantic Web - Spring 2007 Computer Engineering Department Sharif University of Technology.
Interactive Generation of Integrated Schemas Laura Chiticariu et al. Presented by: Meher Talat Shaikh.
1 CIS607, Fall 2004 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Xiangkui Yao Week 6 (Nov. 3)
1 CIS607, Fall 2004 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Julian Catchen Week 3 (Oct. 13)
Xyleme A Dynamic Warehouse for XML Data of the Web.
1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Dong Hwi Kwak Week 5 (Oct. 26)
1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Dayi Zhou Week 4 (Oct. 19)
1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Instructor: Dejing Dou Week 2 (Oct. 5)
1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Paea LePendu Week 8 (Nov. 16)
Reconciling Schemas of Disparate Data Sources: A Machine-Learning Approach AnHai Doan Pedro Domingos Alon Halevy.
1 CIS607, Fall 2006 Semantic Information Integration Instructor: Dejing Dou Week 10 (Nov. 29)
Data Mining with Decision Trees Lutz Hamel Dept. of Computer Science and Statistics University of Rhode Island.
Reconciling Schemas of Disparate Data Sources: A Machine-Learning Approach AnHai Doan Pedro Domingos Alon Halevy.
1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Jiawei Rong Week 10 (Nov. 30)
Learning to Match Ontologies on the Semantic Web AnHai Doan Jayant Madhavan Robin Dhamankar Pedro Domingos Alon Halevy.
1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Shiwoong Kim Week 9 (Nov. 23)
1 Extracting RDF Data from Unstructured Sources Based on an RDF Target Schema Tim Chartrand Research Supported By NSF.
1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Zebin Chen Week 7 (Nov. 9)
1 CIS607, Fall 2004 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Xiaofang Zhang Week 7 (Nov. 10)
Distributed Database Management Systems. Reading Textbook: Ch. 4 Textbook: Ch. 4 FarkasCSCE Spring
QoM: Qualitative and Quantitative Measure of Schema Matching Naiyana Tansalarak and Kajal T. Claypool (Kajal Claypool - presenter) University of Massachusetts,
1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Amanda Hosler Week 6 (Nov. 2)
BIS310: Week 7 BIS310: Structured Analysis and Design Data Modeling and Database Design.
ONTOLOGY MATCHING Part III: Systems and evaluation.
Semantic Web Technologies Lecture # 2 Faculty of Computer Science, IBA.
OMAP: An Implemented Framework for Automatically Aligning OWL Ontologies SWAP, December, 2005 Raphaël Troncy, Umberto Straccia ISTI-CNR
Integrative Model Designed to help students develop a deep understanding of organized bodies of knowledge while simultaneously developing critical thinking.
Chapter 8: Problem Solving
Comparing the Parallel Automatic Composition of Inductive Applications with Stacking Methods Hidenao Abe & Takahira Yamaguchi Shizuoka University, JAPAN.
Copyright © 2005 by South-Western, a division of Thomson Learning All rights reserved 1 Chapter 8 Fundamentals of Decision Making.
Learning Source Mappings Zachary G. Ives University of Pennsylvania CIS 650 – Database & Information Systems October 27, 2008 LSD Slides courtesy AnHai.
©Ian Sommerville 2004Software Engineering, 7th edition. Chapter 7 Slide 1 Requirements Engineering Processes.
UOS 1 Ontology Based Personalized Search Zhang Tao The University of Seoul.
Note #1 FUNCTION We will discuss the characteristics of functions and definitions of domain and range. I will decide if a relation is a function or not.
DATA-DRIVEN UNDERSTANDING AND REFINEMENT OF SCHEMA MAPPINGS Data Integration and Service Computing ITCS 6010.
Querying Structured Text in an XML Database By Xuemei Luo.
GEORGIOS FAKAS Department of Computing and Mathematics, Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester, UK. Automated Generation of Object.
Presenter: Shanshan Lu 03/04/2010
Automatic Image Annotation by Using Concept-Sensitive Salient Objects for Image Content Representation Jianping Fan, Yuli Gao, Hangzai Luo, Guangyou Xu.
Database Systems: Enhanced Entity-Relationship Modeling Dr. Taysir Hassan Abdel Hamid.
Understanding User’s Query Intent with Wikipedia G 여 승 후.
ISWC2007, Nov. 14. Discovering simple mappings between Relational database schemas and ontologies Wei Hu, Yuzhong Qu {whu,
HAITHAM BOU AMMAR MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY Transfer for Supervised Learning Tasks.
Ch- 8. Class Diagrams Class diagrams are the most common diagram found in modeling object- oriented systems. Class diagrams are important not only for.
Scalable Hybrid Keyword Search on Distributed Database Jungkee Kim Florida State University Community Grids Laboratory, Indiana University Workshop on.
Issues in Ontology-based Information integration By Zhan Cui, Dean Jones and Paul O’Brien.
Semantic web Bootstrapping & Annotation Hassan Sayyadi Semantic web research laboratory Computer department Sharif university of.
Exploiting Relevance Feedback in Knowledge Graph Search
Semantic Mappings for Data Mediation
AIFB Ontology Mapping I3CON Workshop PerMIS August 24-26, 2004 Washington D.C., USA Marc Ehrig Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe.
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad 1 Automatic Semantic Web Service Composition based on owl-s Research Proposal presented by : Toktam ghafarian.
Lecture 15: Query Optimization. Very Big Picture Usually, there are many possible query execution plans. The optimizer is trying to chose a good one.
Tuning using Synthetic Workload Summary & Future Work Experimental Results Schema Matching Systems Tuning Schema Matching Systems Formalization of Tuning.
Web-Mining Agents: Transfer Learning TrAdaBoost R. Möller Institute of Information Systems University of Lübeck.
Instance Discovery and Schema Matching With Applications to Biological Deep Web Data Integration Tantan Liu, Fan Wang, Gagan Agrawal {liut, wangfa,
GoRelations: an Intuitive Query System for DBPedia Lushan Han and Tim Finin 15 November 2011
Associative Query Answering via Query Feature Similarity
Machine Learning: Lecture 6
Integrating Taxonomies
Machine Learning: UNIT-3 CHAPTER-1
Tantan Liu, Fan Wang, Gagan Agrawal The Ohio State University
Presentation transcript:

1 CIS607, Fall 2005 Semantic Information Integration Presentation by Enrico Viglino Week 3 (Oct. 12)

2 Questions from Homework 1 About the data and ontologies: – The data source in practice might not be “regular” (structured ?) as DBs. We need an engine to process those unstructured data. How far from there -- Zebin – How to specify and use domain knowledge is critical in iMAP. Why not the user directly digests the database schema and make decision thereafter? --Zebin – The mapping accuracies look impressive for these examples, but what about examples where there is almost nothing related between ontologies, or very little of the two ontologies correspond. Are the mappings still accurate? -- Amanda

3 Questions from Homework 1 (cont ’ d) About machine learning and searching approach: – Please explain the Distribution Estimator (Section 4.1). They are not doing an n-squared comparison, right? -- Paea – How is the neighborhood constraint different from the “ most-specific- parent ” similarity meature? Shouldn ’ t accuracy go up with more data to learn from? -- Paea – For IMAP, it is over-simplified as match generator. What ’ s the other considerations than concatenations? Is the complexity overwhelming ? How can then process shared information and JOIN in databases – Paea – What characteristics of the base learners and taxonomies determine the weights of the base learners for the meta learner? How would you decide that? -- Amanda

4 Questions from Homework 1 (cont ’ d) About machine learning approach: – In the figure 5, the Matching accuracy graph is shown. Are these accuracy of GLUE calculated manually or automatically? -- DH – Can you explain the difference between (1) stopping when the mappings in two consecutive itereations do not change and (2) when the probability do not change? -- DH – If an instance s in the group that belong to B in U2 is not classified as belong to A, is it necessary that s really contributes to the probability of P(~A, B)? -- Jiawei – A meta-learner is more like a decision fusion. What ’ s the exact definition of meta-learner? --Jiawei

5 Questions from Homework 1 (cont ’ d) Other questions about GLUE or iMAP: – Is there some way we can obtain these systems to see them in action -- Shiwoong